Raymer and BIG STACK poker...

[sekrah]

Name one WSOP ME champion who didn't have numerous suckouts?

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]

Name one WSOP ME champion who didn't have numerous suckouts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would guess all of them did. What is your point?

[sekrah]

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.

He's ripping through huge tournament fields!!

A player might come along and be able to it once (Varkonyi, Moneymaker).. but to come through Four huge WSOP fields over 2000+ people and into the money each time, (and 2 final tables, looking for #3)..

Raymer is solidifying himself as one of the greatest NL Holdem tournament players ever and into the realm of Ivey, Lederer, Brunson, Hellmuth, Chan, Cloutier!

He isn't doing this via dumb luck (Varkonyi) and several miracle two-outters (Moneymaker).

Raymer is a GREAT Tournament Poker Player!!

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you knew how to read, you would know I did not say this. I actually said he was a "tremendous player". I said his play at that particular final table was nothing special, and I stand by that.

[Ghazban]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you knew how to read, you would know I did not say this. I actually said he was a "tremendous player". I said his play at that particular final table was nothing special, and I stand by that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Last year's final table kind of played itself due to the way the cards got dealt out. There wasn't a lot of "A outplays B" in any of the televised hands (not just the ones involving Greg, either). I found the 2003 final table to be more interesting from a bystander's perspective.

[BlackAces]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You say he's a decent poker player, but nothing great.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you knew how to read, you would know I did not say this. I actually said he was a "tremendous player". I said his play at that particular final table was nothing special, and I stand by that.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this. Last year's final table kind of played itself due to the way the cards got dealt out. There wasn't a lot of "A outplays B" in any of the televised hands (not just the ones involving Greg, either). I found the 2003 final table to be more interesting from a bystander's perspective.

[/ QUOTE ]
Looking at the hand transcripts at the time, it seemed that there was a lot of back and forth between Raymer and Arieh that never made it to TV.

[legend42]

[ QUOTE ]
He isn't doing this via dumb luck (Varkonyi) and several miracle two-outters (Moneymaker).

[/ QUOTE ]

Several?

[adios]

I'm glad you backtracked from your original post where you implied in my mind that it was more a matter of luck than skill in that Greg "repeatedly" had the worst hand and sucked out. We could quibble what "repeatedly" means in the context of what you wrote. Hey I don't think we should be handing out any victories yet either but my impression from your first post in the thread was that his final table performance and ultimate victory was more a matter of luck than skill. Perhaps the lucky part was playing a relatively inexperienced player in a heads up confrontation. Greg stated that he was surprised that the heads up battle ended so quickly. Williams had a lot of chips compared to the blinds and FWIW could have made things a lot tougher for Greg.

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
Hey I don't think we should be handing out any victories yet either but my impression from your first post in the thread was that his final table performance and ultimate victory was more a matter of luck than skill.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main reason he won was that he had acquired a huge stack before getting to the final table. I would guess this was done through a combination of luck and skill.

[adios]

Actually I think your original point was that negotiating your way through this big of field in two successive years is remarkable feat. Anyway long way to go, probably a lot of really good players left that could win.